All Blacks v Ireland II
-
@profitius said in Ireland II:
From an Ireland point of view the attack was blunt. Its not that big of a surprise because Schmidt is very safety first and likes experienced players who will do the basics well but its also predictable.
i think that's a bit harsh - there have been long periods of all black history where if we lost our 10 and 12 early to injury then our attack would be blunt too.
-
D'arcy article is excellent - best one I have read on the game in total.
What he writes about Cane is totally fair.
I am 100% in the boat that Cane shouldn't have been cited/banned and he wasn't. But the point that people playing rugby shouldn't be getting exposed to being concussed via contact to the head (accidental or intentional) is also fair.
-
@MajorRage said in Ireland II:
D'arcy article is excellent - best one I have read on the game in total.
What he writes about Cane is totally fair.
I am 100% in the boat that Cane shouldn't have been cited/banned and he wasn't. But the point that people playing rugby shouldn't be getting exposed to being concussed via contact to the head (accidental or intentional) is also fair.
the bit where he talks about Ireland is good. The bit where he is talking about us? Not so good. It's just fucking more of the same.
"do i have to send off and All Black here?" is just another way of saying the "one rule for them" bullshit that's been spouted all week.
I played rugby for a fucking long time (too long probably, given my frame) and the only way i could have avoided concussion was to not play at all. Shit happens.
-
@MajorRage Hansen said he didn't have a problem with them citing Cane to have a closer look at it given the result of the impact, but they would (and did) contest it as they felt it was a head clash that caused the injury, not Cane's murderous attack.
-
@mariner4life He is Irish and did play for Ireland, so looking at it from his point of view, I think it's fine.
The point you make about the red card is a fair one, although it's one I think that could be entirely possible.
What he writes about Cane is spot on.
-
@MajorRage said in Ireland II:
@mariner4life He is Irish and did play for Ireland, so looking at it from his point of view, I think it's fine.
The point you make about the red card is a fair one, although it's one I think that could be entirely possible.
What he writes about Cane is spot on.
I'm happy with them looking at it as well. I'm not overly happy about it being fairly widely accepted that the refs should have carded him, and that was a game changer.
-
@taniwharugby Exactly. A bloke gets taken out due to a hit to the head. Thats not good. So the process that follows was fair.
-
The Darcy article is in places insightful and god knows he knows more about international rugby than anyone here.
However as a writer trying to get a "tackler's responsibility for duty of care" point across (which dominates his Cane/Henshaw situation) he lost me when failing to reciprocate on the 2nd worst breach in the entire game of World Rugby's November 11 head high directive:
"The New Zealand post-match defence, led by Hansen - and their media after both players were cited - quickly changed the point of attack: Well, Johnny Sexton should have been cited for the high tackle on Barrett as he crossed for his try. That doesn’t wash. Barrett was moving downwards to ground the ball. Henshaw and Zebo were both upright, moving forward. The Sexton tackle wasn’t even referred to the citing commissioner."
No duty of care when someone is scoring or Barrett ducked so low that Sexton was unable not to hit his face and neck?
The inference that all is ok if (notoriously inconsistent) citing commissioners make no submissions further devalues his objectivity in this instance I reckons
-
@Siam seems he has 2 measuring sticks, one for Ireland and one for NZ.
The one Fekitoa got done for, the guy was falling, and Fekitoa's first impact was on the shoulder.
I thought when Sexton hit BB he was upright and Sexton definitely was aiming high in an effort to wrap up the ball, and think his hand even hit BBs face, and then was odd that when the try had been scored Sexton looked to release and then grabbed again at BBs head while both were on the deck.
Pretty sure BB didn't care either though, it's just the green/black tinted glasses when looking at these things
-
@ACT-Crusader said in Ireland II:
@akan004 said in Ireland II:
@Virgil Unfortunately all this whinging from the opposition is having an impact on how the refs are perceiving the ABs. The fact that they are the most penalised team in world rugby is largely due to this.
Mind reader in your time off are you?
I don't think what fans or media say has any major influence on what a ref does in the heat of the moment during a test match.
This is a direct quote from Shag.
"I think we get our share if not more and I think there is a perception that says look at the All Blacks and not the other team. Sub consciously I'm saying I don't think that is consciously. Look at the last game 14: 4 is not a balanced game is it, it's not reality."
-
@akan004 said in Ireland II:
@ACT-Crusader said in Ireland II:
@akan004 said in Ireland II:
@Virgil Unfortunately all this whinging from the opposition is having an impact on how the refs are perceiving the ABs. The fact that they are the most penalised team in world rugby is largely due to this.
Mind reader in your time off are you?
I don't think what fans or media say has any major influence on what a ref does in the heat of the moment during a test match.
This is a direct quote from Shag.
"I think we get our share if not more and I think there is a perception that says look at the All Blacks and not the other team. Sub consciously I'm saying I don't think that is consciously. Look at the last game 14: 4 is not a balanced game is it, it's not reality."
Careful Shag, that's sounding dangerously Cheika-istic.
I would prefer if anonymous internet idiots like ourselves said such things, not the AB coach.
-
It wouldnt surprise me if we end up in a similar situation as AFL,
Where if a player gets hurt from contact to the head , the tackler is responsible even in a accident , because it his duty of care to make sure the head does not come into contact ,
I hope not,
but there almost seems to be a push to go in that direction in the NH , judging by the last week
-
@akan004 said in Ireland II:
@ACT-Crusader said in Ireland II:
@akan004 said in Ireland II:
@Virgil Unfortunately all this whinging from the opposition is having an impact on how the refs are perceiving the ABs. The fact that they are the most penalised team in world rugby is largely due to this.
Mind reader in your time off are you?
I don't think what fans or media say has any major influence on what a ref does in the heat of the moment during a test match.
This is a direct quote from Shag.
"I think we get our share if not more and I think there is a perception that says look at the All Blacks and not the other team. Sub consciously I'm saying I don't think that is consciously. Look at the last game 14: 4 is not a balanced game is it, it's not reality."
Yeah I saw that and if Shag really believes that then I still reckon it's rubbish.
Alternatively we have seen coaches that like to throw a couple of hand grenades out there hoping one will explode and have the journos picking up the debris to keep pushing what the coach thinks.
-
@ACT-Crusader I posted the interview in the FRance thread, when in the context of what he is talking about it makes sense.
-
-
@beardie said in Ireland II:
So "World Rugby boss Alain Rolland admits to All Blacks that Aaron Smith yellow card was wrong" .
That adds some more spice, doesn't it?
That
That article really is a pile of tripe. assuming Rolland did call Hansen and say the Smith YC was wrong, how come Stuff knew about it. Did someone in the NZ camp reveal this to the press? If so is that any better than Kearney bleating about things after the match? Stuff then goes on to selectively quote Jerry Guscott about "whispering" the refs need to look closer at the All Blacks.He didn't whisper it, it was part of a full article on the BBC and it was mainly very complimentary about the All Blacks - I posted it earlier n this thread.
Honestly it is shit like this that fuels the paranoia about woe is us, they're all out to get us 'cos we keep winning. It's just complete shit.
-
@Catogrande agree totally about the Guscott smear. Cheap and nasty. Guscotts comments in original context related to the speed they play, a good and fair comment.
Hansen today mentioned Rolland told him on monday. It's on that radio link someone posted (two links, last third on the first and a couple of minutes of the 2nd).
Hansens parts are worth a listen. Honest and based on realty I reckon. That hansen waits till thursday to mention it reflects well on him
These links. 10 mins into this one http://120.138.20.16/WeekOnDemand/radiosport/2016.11.24-17.00.00-D.mp3
Start of this one http://120.138.20.16/WeekOnDemand/radiosport/2016.11.17-17.15.00-D.mp3
-
@Catogrande stuff had a bullshit headline about Guscott and when you read the story it bore no resemblance what the headline inferred and was actually quite interesting.
Have you noticed theres a whole thread about how shit Stuff is? They tried to merge with ME this year and when the commerce commission turned them down they used the hashtag #stuffme on twitter.
-
@jegga said in Ireland II:
@Catogrande stuff had a bullshit headline about Guscott and when you read the story it bore no resemblance what the headline inferred and was actually quite interesting.
Have you noticed theres a whole thread about how shit Stuff is? They tried to merge with ME this year and when the commerce commission turned them down they used the hashtag #stuffme on twitter.
Another reminder to resist judging a group of people by the slop their media dishes up
-
This post is deleted!
